Mailing-List: contact users-help@trafficserver.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@trafficserver.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of h.reindl@thelounge.net
 designates 91.118.73.15 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <5206A77A.7080804@thelounge.net>
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2013 22:50:02 +0200
From: Reindl Harald <h.reindl@thelounge.net>
Organization: the lounge interactive design
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:17.0) Gecko/20130805 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
CC: users@trafficserver.apache.org
Subject: Re: 3.3.5: performance regression?
References: <52063E61.8090201@thelounge.net>
 <153920A9-F441-4991-8034-A2D9DAB46FF0@apache.org>
 <520658DF.7010402@thelounge.net>
 <E6C4E04F-9024-4FEB-9F23-08FA46668231@apache.org>
 <52067C94.3030706@thelounge.net> <52068FB3.1090803@thelounge.net>
 <CB44E053-0937-4343-8122-A131C592AE23@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <CB44E053-0937-4343-8122-A131C592AE23@apache.org>
OpenPGP: id=7F780279;
	url=http://arrakis.thelounge.net/gpg/h.reindl_thelounge.net.pub.txt
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature";
 boundary="sU5cwujrl4dAtp4Dh3epfTcPHmQWF2I1U"

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--sU5cwujrl4dAtp4Dh3epfTcPHmQWF2I1U
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Am 10.08.2013 22:24, schrieb Leif Hedstrom:
> On Aug 10, 2013, at 1:08 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl@thelounge.net> wro=
te:
>=20
>> Am 10.08.2013 19:47, schrieb Reindl Harald:
>>> i am currently working at my F18 SPEC-file to reflect the latest
>>> changes in my packaging and rebuild 3.2.5 ASAP on Fedora
>>> 19 so that "yum update" and "yum downgrade" gives a better picture
>>>
>>> but i doubt that the 3 years old XEON at the company will
>>> outperform the one year old IvyBdrige at home with the
>>> same environment, benchmarks besides ATS are compareable
>>>
>>> we will see
>>
>> Am 10.08.2013 19:37, schrieb Leif Hedstrom:
>>> Yeah I've tested it with my normal perf regressions, and 3.3.5 was
>>> the same as 3.2.4. In my small object test I get 160,000 qps
>>
>> on what hardware straight from hell do you get 160 thousand qps?
>> however, back to topic...=85
>=20
> model name	: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU         920  @ 2.67GHz
>=20
> I believe Bryan has clocked it at close to 300,000 QPS on modern dual s=
ocket machines

hmmmm - if i find enough spare time i will test ATS on teh host-setup
instead the VM, not that i ever will use bare-metal servers, but
i am interested :-)

>> ______________________________________________________________________=
______
>>
>> OK, sorry for the noise, that's why there was a "?" in the subject
>> same virtual machine with trafficserver-3.2.5-3.fc19.20130810.rh.x86_6=
4
>>
>> Total transferred:      94732065 bytes
>> HTML transferred:       64253704 bytes
>> Requests per second:    3206.60 [#/sec] (mean)
>> Time per request:       62.371 [ms] (mean)
>> Time per request:       0.312 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent reques=
ts)
>> Transfer rate:          2966.48 [Kbytes/sec] received
> =20
> I have no idea at this moment, but I'll double check when I get home. S=
o I understand, you get 90k QPS with 3.2.4 and 3k QPS with 3.3.5 ?

no, 3k QPS with both on the same VM
it's not the ATS version as thought

90k QPS are impossible here, at least not with a network-stack betweens A=
TS and "ab"

> One thing, did you try clearing the cache after upgrading from 3.3.5?=20

yes, i learned to delete all cache files und on the production machine
with raw disk dd if=3D/dev/zero of=3D/dev/sdc bs=3D1M count=3D50 before s=
tart
with a changed version

> As for virtualization, I measure around 5-10x worse performance on virt=
ualization vs bare metal.
> I've tested this on many setups (including AWS), and I've verified it o=
n ATS, Varnish and Nginx
> (they all see the same degradation).

we are 100% virtualized for a lot of reasons and it seems the difference =
here is between
VMware ESXi (bare-metal hypervisor) and VMware Workstation (hosted virtua=
lization) which
in no tests execpt http-proxy made such a big difference over years

most likely the virtual network bare metal versus bridged on a Linux host=

however, i am still impressed about the difference and the decision to ta=
ke
money in the hands for the vSphere cluster seems to be once more confirme=
d


--sU5cwujrl4dAtp4Dh3epfTcPHmQWF2I1U
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlIGp3oACgkQhmBjz394AnkdzACfRLeMZX9u0NxXGZjdTEYgbgZk
kP4An0tkA6ik3LtbVsVkm3c1D+4juAlQ
=ha4l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--sU5cwujrl4dAtp4Dh3epfTcPHmQWF2I1U--